I wouldn't worry about the Tim Horton's crowd overmuch. The only big thing happening right now in this country seems to be the tarsands, and getting a ludicrously overpaid trades or labour job in Northern Alberta seems the next best thing to winning Lotto 649. And it's not just Newfies anymore- more and more it's people from Ontario and BC that are making their way up north.

Anything to keep the air in this bubble is going to be ok with this crowd. Just let me get my piece of the pie right now, and to hell with the rest of it. That's the Alberta philosophy, and it seems to be the dominant one in this country. Sell Nexxen to the Chinese? Hell, sell my grandma to them, if that's what it takes to make me $40.00 an hour with a high school education.

So, naked greed now trumps old-school xenophobia as a Canadian value? What's happening to the country I knew.

Seriously though. The picture you paint does not fully jibe with the impressons I get from various quarters, not all of them by any means nationalist or anti-Commuist. Do you think you might be overemphasizing the sentiments of people who actually go to work in the Alberta tarsands, as being representative of public opinion? Obviously, someone who decides to pick up and go to Alberta for the $40/hr job is probably not gonna be bad-mouthing the oil industry. But, while from an Alberta perspective it might seem like EVERYONE is doing that, it's still a tiny, tiny fraction of the Canadian population. Maybe slightly less tiny if you factor in the family back home getting remittances, but still a pretty small group of people.

Or is there a general sentiment of "What's good for the oil patch is good for the country" about? Like I say, I'm really not getting that impression at all. But it's possible that, as usual with these things, opposition is probably a mile wide and an inch deep.

Well yes, I could have a skewed perspective from where I live and the work I do, and that last post may have been a bit too much on the cynical side. You may well be right about the general disdain for this deal, however I don't see it being enough for anyone to actually do anything about it.

But let me get even more cynical about this in regards to local opinion. I think the reason that this sale isn't getting the people who depend directly on the oil business- at the level of doing the actual work- all that upset is because the ownership doesn't make a hell of a lot of difference as regards local impact. Canadians don't need any outside help to screw each other over. In that we are proudly self sufficient.

What difference does it really make to a northern community whether companies like Nexxen are Canadian or Chinese? Does it really matter to a rigpush in Conklin whether the profits go to blow and call girls for assholes in Calgary or to escorts and scotch for assholes in China? Maybe it does, but not much.

A Canadian oil company is just as likely to hire as many temporary foreign workers as they possibly can, cut as many environmental corners as they think can avoid detection, invest purely token amounts in the wellbeing of local communities, pass on as many costs as possible to the taxpayer while paying as little royalty as possible, and outsource as many of the major manufacturing jobs as feasible to the States or China anyway.

Can you tell me why it is better to pump that oil sand crap half-way across wherever it is dug up all the way across the US down to Texas rather than just down to the Lake Superior and ship the refined stuff out the Great Lakes?

This whole deal is such a bad idea on so many levels. Better take a good long look who is going to be operating this company and who they will be hiring. Nothing is as it seems. These are not boyscouts these are the pirates of Guanzhou who play for keeps think that rules, laws are for the stupid.

Some mine in northern BC was sold to the Chinese. They imported all the labor from China. The official reason stated in The Province, from the company, was that the Chinese workers were less likely to form a union.

Some mine in northern BC was sold to the Chinese. They imported all the labor from China. The official reason stated in The Province, from the company, was that the Chinese workers were less likely to form a union.

More jobs lost because unions want special treatment. Grocery stores can't form a monopoly to force customers to buy food at a higher price, but employees expect to create a monopoly to sell labor to customers at a higher price.

Grocery stores can't form a monopoly to force customers to buy food at a higher price, but employees expect to create a monopoly to sell labor to customers at a higher price.

My city of about 100k people has 4 branches of the same grocery store (plus a Whole Foods and some local corner stores). Most cities have a lower middle class grocery store chain, a middle class chain and an upper class chain. There are fewer and fewer food producers and the supply chain is similarly concentrated. Let's not be naive about the structure of the economy.

Grocery stores can't form a monopoly to force customers to buy food at a higher price, but employees expect to create a monopoly to sell labor to customers at a higher price.

My city of about 100k people has 4 branches of the same grocery store (plus a Whole Foods and some local corner stores). Most cities have a lower middle class grocery store chain, a middle class chain and an upper class chain. There are fewer and fewer food producers and the supply chain is similarly concentrated. Let's not be naive about the structure of the economy.

Yes, but other producers are still free to move in. A monopoly it is not.

Quote:

Employees have collective interests best negotiated collectively.

Also true to a degree, but they should expect to deal with the consequences. If they voluntarily form unions (in the private sector) to negotiate better wages that is reasonable. But they shouldn't be surprised if their employers shops around for a better deal. Forming picket lines is as offensive as trying to impose a monopoly. Monopoly is always bad.

Some mine in northern BC was sold to the Chinese. They imported all the labor from China. The official reason stated in The Province, from the company, was that the Chinese workers were less likely to form a union.

More jobs lost because unions want special treatment. Grocery stores can't form a monopoly to force customers to buy food at a higher price, but employees expect to create a monopoly to sell labor to customers at a higher price.

I enjoy comm's posts, I really do. But we're coming on 2013, and we should really know better.

Private unions have been crushed. They only occupy 7% of the field. 93% of American business, forget all the off-shoring for a second, 93% do not have unions. How can anyone say that unions are causing significant rates of unemployment in the United States?

Quote:

Union membership in the private sector has fallen under 7% — levels not seen since 1932. Unions allege that employer-incited opposition has contributed to this decline in membership. The most prominent unions are among public sector employees such as teachers and police. Members of unions are disproportionately older, male and residents of the Northeast, the Midwest, and California. Union workers average 10-30% higher pay than non-union in America after controlling for individual, job, and labor market characteristics.

Just four years after the worst shock to the economy since the Great Depression, U.S. corporate profits are stronger than ever.

In the third quarter [of 2012], corporate earnings were $1.75 trillion, up 18.6% from a year ago, according to last week's gross domestic product report. That took after-tax profits to their greatest percentage of GDP in history.

But the record profits come at the same time that workers' wages have fallen to their lowest-ever share of GDP.

In the end, it all goes on the world market, so wouldn't it be better for us to let you guys ship it to Vancouver, sell it to the Chinese, refine it somewhere along the line while endangering either your or the Chinese environment and spare the Ogalalla Aquifer and the entire Wheat Belt of the US (the part not devastated by global warming)?

As a matter of fact, that very plan(more or less, I don't know all the details) is being proposed by an oil company called Enbridge, with the strong support of my home government of Alberta.

Northern Gateway

Problem is, almost nobody in BC supports this idea, for the reasons you imply in your comments. It has led to a somewhat unusual spat between Alberta and BC, with the BC premier now demanding that the Alberta government cut them in for whatever profits result from the pipeline. Alberta has responded that BC should take this up with Enbridge, not Alberta.

Hm. Looks like I might have to backtrack a bit on that "Nobody in BC supports this idea" line. The BC provincial election was held the other day, and the NDP, generally regarded as the major vehicle of anti-pipeline sentiment, managed to defy every single poll and get itself defeated by the incumbent Liberals, who are more open to negotiating pipelines through the province.

Some analysts have it that the NDP lost because of their opposition to expanding the Kinder Morgan line, a different pipeline than the proposed Enbridge, but one that also carries Alberta oil westward. Though it was possibly just the same old story of BC inlanders deciding they're REALLY terrified of a "socialist" government(apart from any specific issue), and flocking in a panic to the most viable right-wing party.

But even if pipelines weren't THE pivotal issue for Liberal voters, it will now be a lot harder for progressives and environmentalists in BC to claim that no one in the province wants more dirty Alberta oil flowing in. Because they've just nixed the best chance they had to ensure that doesn't happen.

In the end, it all goes on the world market, so wouldn't it be better for us to let you guys ship it to Vancouver, sell it to the Chinese, refine it somewhere along the line while endangering either your or the Chinese environment and spare the Ogalalla Aquifer and the entire Wheat Belt of the US (the part not devastated by global warming)?

As a matter of fact, that very plan(more or less, I don't know all the details) is being proposed by an oil company called Enbridge, with the strong support of my home government of Alberta.

Northern Gateway

Problem is, almost nobody in BC supports this idea, for the reasons you imply in your comments. It has led to a somewhat unusual spat between Alberta and BC, with the BC premier now demanding that the Alberta government cut them in for whatever profits result from the pipeline. Alberta has responded that BC should take this up with Enbridge, not Alberta.

Hm. Looks like I might have to backtrack a bit on that "Nobody in BC supports this idea" line. The BC provincial election was held the other day, and the NDP, generally regarded as the major vehicle of anti-pipeline sentiment, managed to defy every single poll and get itself defeated by the incumbent Liberals, who are more open to negotiating pipelines through the province.

Some analysts have it that the NDP lost because of their opposition to expanding the Kinder Morgan line, a different pipeline than the proposed Enbridge, but one that also carries Alberta oil westward. Though it was possibly just the same old story of BC inlanders deciding they're REALLY terrified of a "socialist" government(apart from any specific issue), and flocking in a panic to the most viable right-wing party.

But even if pipelines weren't THE pivotal issue for Liberal voters, it will now be a lot harder for progressives and environmentalists in BC to claim that no one in the province wants more dirty Alberta oil flowing in. Because they've just nixed the best chance they had to ensure that doesn't happen.

Interesting. Thanks for the update.

And a totally unrelated note, I wonder what happened to comm, he hasn't posted here for quite awhile now.